Why is it horrible to post on old threads?

[Medieval Mom]

I'm a newbie, and this is the only internet forum to which I belong, so please humor me. ;)

 

Why is it so horrible to post on old threads?

What makes a thread "old"? A month? 6 months? A year?

Why is it not better to add to any old thread, than start a new one with exactly the same question?

 

I ask this, because I saw on another thread that many people have this as a pet peeve. I've innocently done this in the past, not realizing that people felt so strongly about it. Honestly, I thought it would be better to add to the discussion than to post an entirely new thread about the very same topic.

 

For example, what if you were interested in using a rather obscure book/curriculum. You dutifully perform a search, and come up with 2-3 threads that have 0-6 replies, but they're all "old". Perhaps you have some experience with this book/curriculum, and have something relevant to add. Perhaps you have the very same question yourself. What is the correct next step? A) Start a new thread posting the same query or B) Resurrect the thread, in the hopes that 1) others may be interested, 2) the OP may welcome another reply 3)perhaps others will chime in that completely missed the question at the time. C) Figure that if no one commented the first time, it's a silly question, best left alone. :lol: D) Something else entirely obvious that I'm not thinking of at the moment.

 

So, fill me in! I'm all :bigear:.

 

P.S. I also apologize for any threads I've brought back from their peaceful rest, thus annoying veteran posters, who can only roll their eyes at my ignorance, or fear that I'm up to no good. :lol:

[Mrs Mungo]

It isn't horrible. I just feel dumb when I answer and realize I said almost the same thing when the thread was new a year or two before.

 

It is only horrible when they are bumped to be mean to someone. Yes, that has happened.

[Jean in Newcastle]

When you resurrected The Shack thread, I felt like it was appropriate because while the OP had already made her decision not to read the book, your response was that you wished you had read the thread before reading the book yourself.

 

Resurrecting a 3 year old post to tell someone to do xyz with their toddler is a bit annoying because that toddler is not a toddler anymore. But if you have a toddler with the same problem, please read the thread and learn from our mistakes.;)

 

Resurrecting a controversial thread is often suspect because we wonder if that person resurrected the thread simply to get a rise out of people again.

 

If you do a search and find old threads which don't quite help, it's better to actually ask a question on a new thread because many many people only read the OP and will not read your added question at the bottom. (Which is another pet peeve of mine but that's another issue!:D)

[KAR120C]

I'm a newbie, and this is the only internet forum to which I belong, so please humor me. ;)

 

Why is it so horrible to post on old threads?

What makes a thread "old"? A month? 6 months? A year?

Why is it not better to add to any old thread, than start a new one with exactly the same question?

 

I'd much rather someone post to an old thread than ask the exact same question again, but better than that would be to read everything that was answered already and then ask a followup question. So for instance, "I read that Singapore Science is strong in critical thinking and light in vocabulary coverage, but what I'm really wondering is whether it would be good preparation for ___", or "I see there are already five hundred threads on what to do at the end of the math curriculum sequence we're on, and that __ is frequently recommended, but I was wondering if someone had ever used that with a kid [with dysgraphia/ with a particular strength in writing/ younger or older than average]"

 

As far as what makes a thread old... it's kind of a judgment call. It's like if a messageboard is one giant cocktail party with different conversations going on in different little groups of people, and people mingling around and going from conversation to conversation... Posting to an old thread is like making a comment after the topic has been changed. But knowing when that is involves knowing your fellow party guests, knowing how the conversation really flows, etc. Hard to say. Same with keeping a thread alive too long. People have moved on.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I'm a newbie, and this is the only internet forum to which I belong, so please humor me. ;)

 

Why is it so horrible to post on old threads?

What makes a thread "old"? A month? 6 months? A year?

Why is it not better to add to any old thread, than start a new one with exactly the same question?

 

I ask this, because I saw on another thread that many people have this as a pet peeve. I've innocently done this in the past, not realizing that people felt so strongly about it. Honestly, I thought it would be better to add to the discussion than to post an entirely new thread about the very same topic.

 

For example, what if you were interested in using a rather obscure book/curriculum. You dutifully perform a search, and come up with 2-3 threads that have 0-6 replies, but they're all "old". Perhaps you have some experience with this book/curriculum, and have something relevant to add. Perhaps you have the very same question yourself. What is the correct next step? A) Start a new thread posting the same query or B) Resurrect the thread, in the hopes that 1) others may be interested, 2) the OP may welcome another reply 3)perhaps others will chime in that completely missed the question at the time. C) Figure that if no one commented the first time, it's a silly question, best left alone. :lol: D) Something else entirely obvious that I'm not thinking of at the moment.

 

So, fill me in! I'm all :bigear:.

 

P.S. I also apologize for any threads I've brought back from their peaceful rest, thus annoying veteran posters, who can only roll their eyes at my ignorance, or fear that I'm up to no good. :lol:

 

The example that you gave of finding an older thread about a book or curriculum, especially one that is rather obscure probably wouldn't be an issue to add to, especially if you mention something in your post that shows you recognize this is an older thread. So for example I might make a post like this:

 

"I know this is an older thread, but I wanted to mention how we'd used xyz this last year, because it worked really well for my son . . ." and then continue with whatever comment or question you had.

 

What does tend to raise an eyebrow is when a thread on a controversial topic is brought back from the dead. But they are brought back with just a comment like "That's outrageous" or ":iagree:". And other readers, who don't remember the original thread or weren't on the board then, pile on, as if it is something new. Sometimes the thread was something that board members had had some conflict over different viewpoints and this bumping up without adding anything may have an effect of kicking a sleeping dog instead of letting it lie.

 

Sometimes threads are resurected by someone whose post count is very low. Which makes people wonder if the purpose is to either boost post count so they can post on the sale board or to be a troll (the board does have some interesting history with trolls, some of whom spun tangled stories of family drama and pulled other in).

 

So while I doubt that anyone would have an issue with you adding to older threads about curriculum or homeschooling techniques, it might be better not to revive a year old thread about how mean a soccer coach was or how out of line a school administrator was.

 

Just my $0.02.

[PinkInTheBlue]

Personally, assuming it's not done with any malice, I have no problem with resurrecting an old thread. Of course I have found myself reading a thread before realizing this sounded familiar only to realize it was old. That was a bit weird but it didn't make me mad/upset. Sometimes new interest in an old thread is good because we get new perspectives on previous conversations.

[Brilliant]

I'm a newbie, and this is the only internet forum to which I belong, so please humor me. ;)

 

 

 

I had to look at the date of this thread to make sure it wasn't an old one...because you have 988 posts yet you consider yourself a newbie? I wonder what that makes me. :001_unsure:

[Garga]

A newbie? You have almost 1000 posts and have been on the boards for two years. How are you a newbie? (Not snarky...just wondering....did you leave and come back recently?)

Edited October 15, 2010 by Garga

[RoughCollie]

I've seen old threads resurrected simply because a true newbie wants to increase her post count so she can sell things here. That annoys me.

[DarlaS]

A newbie? You have almost 1000 posts and have been on the boards for two years. How are you a newbie? (Not snarky...just wondering....did you leave and come back recently?)

 

I thought she used the ;) smiley for that reason... but it is possible to feel like a newbie around here for a very long time.

[Corraleno]

Personally, I find it far more annoying when someone (especially someone who just joined) starts a new thread with a question that would easily have been answered by a 30-second search — or even just clicking on page 2. IMO, starting a new thread with a title like "Tell me about X Math Program" without bothering to read any of the 50+ previous threads about X Math Program, is lazy and rather rude. I think WTMers are far more tolerant of that than most boards. On the boards my DH frequents, those kind of questions would be met with "Dude, ever hear of the search function???"

 

I'd much rather someone resurrect a previous thread and add any specific questions they have, because at least it shows they did some research. Where it gets annoying is when, as Jean pointed out, someone resurrects a thread from 2-3 years ago where a member was asking for advice on a personal or parenting issue that's no longer relevant, or when someone brings back a contentious political thread only to add "I agree."

 

Jackie

[keptwoman]

I thought she used the ;) smiley for that reason... but it is possible to feel like a newbie around here for a very long time.

Sure is, I still feel like a newbie.

[Medieval Mom]

I had to look at the date of this thread to make sure it wasn't an old one...because you have 988 posts yet you consider yourself a newbie? I wonder what that makes me. :001_unsure:

 

A newbie? You have almost 1000 posts and have been on the boards for two years. How are you a newbie? (Not snarky...just wondering....did you leave and come back recently?)

 

Well, in comparison to some of you with several thousand posts, I DO still feel like a newbie! I never even HEARD of a troll, or people resurrecting threads from the dead in order to be malicious before. Besides, my eldest is only in second grade. Although we've been homeschooling from K, I humbly submit that I'm still learning the ropes :) Maybe "beginner" is a better term!

 

P.S. Wow --- Has it been two years already?:w00t:

Edited October 16, 2010 by Medieval Mom

[Medieval Mom]

It isn't horrible. I just feel dumb when I answer and realize I said almost the same thing when the thread was new a year or two before.

 

It is only horrible when they are bumped to be mean to someone. Yes, that has happened.

 

 

Wow! I just didn't realize that people did this! I guess I hang out mostly on the Curriculum Board. I'm pretty naive to the motives of pot-stirrers on this board. It's not as common, although possible, to get quite so heating up over penmanship. :D

[Medieval Mom]

It isn't horrible. I just feel dumb when I answer and realize I said almost the same thing when the thread was new a year or two before.

 

It is only horrible when they are bumped to be mean to someone. Yes, that has happened.

 

I won't reply to every post, but I want to thank each and every one of you for taking me seriously, answering frankly, and giving excellent advice. I appreciate it!

 

Despite trolls and pot-stirrers (why do I have the image of MacBeth's witches when I type this? :001_huh: ), this is still a fantastic board. I'm so thankful Peace Hill Press provides this forum for us :) Thanks, SWB.

[Mothersweets]

I had to look at the date of this thread to make sure it wasn't an old one...because you have 988 posts yet you consider yourself a newbie? I wonder what that makes me. :001_unsure:

 

 

I thought the same thing! I don't consider myself a newbie; I just don't talk much. :001_smile:

[Peela]

It isn't horrible. I just feel dumb when I answer and realize I said almost the same thing when the thread was new a year or two before.

 

 

Yes, but even worse is when I respond differently to how I responded a year ago, and completely contradict myself!

 

To the OP...its not such a big deal. But, this board moves very fast and is therefore quite fresh several times a day. I usually only open the first 3 pages, a couple of times a day (OK, 3 or 4 times some days!). I respond to several posts most days. For many of us I woudl say its more of a womens online community, with many conversations going on at once, and we join in here and there where it appeals. Much support can be found and given here but generally speaking, dragging up an old conversation just feels a bit offputting when all the others are fresh ones. We are thrown off by it, especially if we answered it last time and see the same question come up...we naturally presume it is someone new asking. We are not likely to wade through 5 or 10 pages to see if we already responded.

Edited October 16, 2010 by Peela

[flyingiguana]

Did someone already suggest this? If you want to talk about an old thread, maybe it makes sense to start a new thread with a link to the old thread. Then it's clear that there is an old thread on the topic, but the reader comes in reading the new threads first.

[EmilyK]

Personally, I find it far more annoying when someone (especially someone who just joined) starts a new thread with a question that would easily have been answered by a 30-second search — or even just clicking on page 2. IMO, starting a new thread with a title like "Tell me about X Math Program" without bothering to read any of the 50+ previous threads about X Math Program, is lazy and rather rude. I think WTMers are far more tolerant of that than most boards. On the boards my DH frequents, those kind of questions would be met with "Dude, ever hear of the search function???"

 

 

Jackie

 

This is my thought / question too. I get what everyone is saying when it is advice about a personal situation. If it is a curriculum/book/etc type question, I prefer seeing it all in one thread. So (thinking I was doing the right thing) if I have a question about resources for X topic, or questions about Y book, I do a search first, and if there was an old thread, I intentionally resurrect it, usually with a "I know this is an old thread, but" to start. I usually click on the "show new posts" button when opening a thread so I know if I'm entering midstream that I have read most of it before. If that isn't the board culture, I'm happy to adapt.

[coffeefreak]

I'm a newbie, and this is the only internet forum to which I belong, so please humor me. ;)

 

Why is it so horrible to post on old threads?

What makes a thread "old"? A month? 6 months? A year?

Why is it not better to add to any old thread, than start a new one with exactly the same question?

 

I ask this, because I saw on another thread that many people have this as a pet peeve. I've innocently done this in the past, not realizing that people felt so strongly about it. Honestly, I thought it would be better to add to the discussion than to post an entirely new thread about the very same topic.

 

For example, what if you were interested in using a rather obscure book/curriculum. You dutifully perform a search, and come up with 2-3 threads that have 0-6 replies, but they're all "old". Perhaps you have some experience with this book/curriculum, and have something relevant to add. Perhaps you have the very same question yourself. What is the correct next step? A) Start a new thread posting the same query or B) Resurrect the thread, in the hopes that 1) others may be interested, 2) the OP may welcome another reply 3)perhaps others will chime in that completely missed the question at the time. C) Figure that if no one commented the first time, it's a silly question, best left alone. :lol: D) Something else entirely obvious that I'm not thinking of at the moment.

 

So, fill me in! I'm all :bigear:.

 

P.S. I also apologize for any threads I've brought back from their peaceful rest, thus annoying veteran posters, who can only roll their eyes at my ignorance, or fear that I'm up to no good. :lol:

 

If I resurrect an old thread, I state it up front in my response, "I know this is an older thread, but this is why I've resurrected it." I think when people do that, no one minds. I started doing that because I was annoyed with people not responding to my new threads, or saying, "You might find your answer here," and linking me to an old thread. 9 times out of 10, I still had a question not answered in the old thread. It's like someone said on the other thread you're talking about, sometimes we're darned if we do and darned if we don't. :001_smile:

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

[DarlaS]

Certain curriculum threads are pages long and (surprisingly often) full of non-relevant stuff. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. I would be annoyed if I was a newbie looking for info on some of them. Seriously.

 

OTOH, I'd personally love it if someone resurrected one of my old threads (or anyone's for that matter) in which I was looking for info on a somewhat more obscure program, and got five or so replies. :tongue_smilie:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I think of this board as a living room. To me, we are all sitting around talking to each other. Those moms over there are talking about whether or not a board member should cook her FIL a bunch of meals for xmas (my vote is yes!) another group is talking about bullying in dance class, etc.

 

Resurrecting old threads for no purpose other than an :iagree: to me, seems like saying, in someone's living room, "remember what we were talking about in January.....about shopping carts? Well, I was thinking about what Sally said and :iagree:"

 

 

Odd is what that would be.